ABSO-FRIGGING-LUTELY! Levels (or at least the way that they have been done) are bad! I hate it, I just can''t seem to think of an alternative. But I think basing it entirely on my skill-based system would work well if you ignored levels for the player (generally) and just "leveled" their aptitude in certain skills (of course, they need to be abstracted, so they are no longer levels ).
Fat_tony, I hope you can agree with my style of posting, if you don''t, just tell me and I''ll be slightly less hostile
quote:
Original post by fat_tony_123 If the monsters'' HP were random enough, I don''t see any point in hiding the damage.
Well then there wouldn''t be any point in showing it either, since it''s mostly random! ( Aren''t I annoying? ) If the monster''s HP drop when you get better, you''ll not cause more damage, there will simply be less damage to do. If improving sword skill improves damage done, that might be shown this way, that''s true. It''s a possible system, quite abstract, to have "anatomical knowledge" of the monster your fighting (dropping monster HP) and "weapon skill" (increasing weapon damage). But - if you now stop showing damage, the character will simply get "better", not better at anything specific, and this might be more rewarding because it''s fuzzier?
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment. ~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~ ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
It's only funny 'till someone gets hurt.And then it's just hilarious.Unless it's you.
I just finished reading this entire, convoluted, bebaffling ping-pong match of a post, and I really just want to take a nap now =) but I''m way too argumentative for that, so I''ll type a bit, and if it seems worthwhile, I''ll post it.
Ok, I''ve read through this post, and it seems worthwhile. But who am I to judge? I love hearing myself talk. 8]
Why is the DnD stat system (or some derivative system) the way it is? The technology of the dice, and the fact that the human mind had to calculate these numbers and has a hard time precisely doing,say: (a*b^6)+(4374.03453621/3.67)*(b^[a*9/4]) blah blah blah, you get the idea. So this absurdly simple system was made for all the purposes of stats we''ve mentioned. My point is that it had to be SIMPLE so that JES'' FOLKS could do the math w/out the help of STEPHEN MOTHER-FREAKIN HAWKINGS. Now, a computer has at least the computational capacity of Stephen Mother-Freaking Hawkings, and numbers do a mighty fine job of modelling systems. True? Now, the challenge is really simple, and it seems so obvious to not be so lazy as to use the DnD system. The challenge in an RPG, just as in any other game, is to model the system you are trying to attain.
That sounds really flat compared to alot of the hair-shirt rantings I''ve seen on this topic. Don''t get me wrong, I love hair-shirt ranting, but its worth mentioning that the only reason we''re even discussing this is that people feel so damn comfortable with systems basically like DnD, where you had char sheets and could see your character represented in numbers. Again, this was simply for ease of computation.
What does every game programmer need to even begin his job? A good shot of espresso and the daily electroshock treatment. After that? A basic, usually extremely simplified model of the world, including physics, interpersonal reactions, and all that. These are statistics, and part of a good design is what to leave in or out as far as these go. Still with me?
Then why is it that just about EVERY RPG ON THE MARKET feels justified in faking this step? With computers'' computational ability, we can selectively pick and choose the statistics to be simulated in every game, depending on the nature of the game, and pretty much blow the subject matter of RPG''s wide open. No longer would they have to be based on raw combat and killing. Why have so many attempts at changing this gib fixation gone awry? Because nobody went back to the pre-PC root (personal computer, not player character) of role-playing and evaluated the system for their particular game. They got stuck in the worst ghetto-nature of the genre, and assumed they needed either STR, DEX, INT, WIS, CHA or some iteration of that to be a "real RPG". This system was made for Dungeons and Dragons, folks. If there ain''t no Dragons in your game, and nary a dungeon in sight, why are you even considering this system? Would you use Quake''s engine to push a polygonal Tetris?
For example, if we''re doing a political RPG, (horrible idea for a game, IMHO, but just an example) you might have hidden game engine stats for the acceptableness of abortion in that country, you might have stats on the candidate''s wife''s popularity, or how well the candidate dresses and how well he speaks with lobbyists, which is different than his public speaking score, and you could easily develop a hundred stats like these, all of which together would make an incredibly rich game, where the player was able to make real decisions and see real consequences! All this would be collapsed into "CHARISMA" in DnD! This is an extreme example, but it applies to so many games.
Why, in Baldur''s Gate, for example, did my reputation with the nobles of the city of Baldur''s Gate have anything to do with how the gutter scum of Beregost treated me? This would have been easily implemented, no branching pathways, just an array of possible reactions, with pointers based on independant variables.(I''m on a rant here, so please don''t pick out the technical gaffes, K) Yet they collapsed all this into one statistic called Reputation! And got praised high and low for it! And from what I hear, features like this are all about "BANG for your buck". The currency in question is the developer''s time, and low-tech features like this that you see even in text adventures, add an extraordinary amount of perceived depth to a game (BANG) for a bare scraping of man-hours. It really makes me wonder why you see small but valuable details like this scrapped in favor of displaying ten more polygons at a time.
Sorry for the long post guys, its just that I haven''t been involved w/ this topic from the start and had alot to say.
If you see the Buddha on the road, Kill Him. -apocryphal
I think you're absolutely right, Keith. It does make more sense to not show damage, because if the damage is randomized enough, then the player might be confused about all of the differing damage.
Dwarfsoft, I got around to reading your doc, and it pretty much sums up every forum in the GameDev network. I realize that it is mostly not your work, but there are many good ideas in one spot, and I think that with further development it could be THE definitive RPG document. I agree that players should have to feed and rest their characters, but not make them go to the bathroom. It's simply too tedious.
I have a question concerning my battle system. You know how the party averages out HP for the monsters? Well what would happen if one of the party members got killed? If there is a new average, the monster could die right after the character dies, but it seems silly to include your best warriors skills in a fight where he doesn't fight. The monster's death could be blamed on bleeding to death, but whenever a character dies? What do you think?
Another quick question: when would the sparring/weight lifting stop increasing the character's skills?
Edited by - fat_tony_123 on August 15, 2000 3:08:55 PM
Development would stop when it should for that particular stat system. Some (not me) prefer stats to just keep going, others prefer a very small range for them (Shadowrun, 1-6, 7+ with fatty enhancements). I suppose it just depends. Of course, there are balancing factors that have to go along with it, and maybe chars have build stats, like this guy has a thin, medium, large build, etc. There really is no set answer as a general thing.
------------------------------------------- "What's the story with your face, son?!?"
-------------------------------------------The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.Exodus 14:14
Anonymous Poster - that''s exactly what I''ve been getting at all the time. ( Though I''ve carefully avoided the use of "statistics" or "stats" as a word to describe them, they seem to generate too much confusion. ) We have a calculator at our disposal that can track hundreds of internal variables, without us having to worry about their complexity. Lets use it for something else than str, dex, etc.
Fat_tony - the dying thing... I''ve thought the same as well, and I''m not sure the monster''s HP should change anymore after it has been encountered. You meet a monster - HP is calculated, and it will always have that amount, barring wounds. That way, when a character dies, the monster won''t suddenly pass away mysteriously. About advancement, there are many ways to cap advancement. Nonlinear progression, perhaps even decay as Landfish suggested now and then...
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment. ~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~ ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
It's only funny 'till someone gets hurt.And then it's just hilarious.Unless it's you.
I think decay would work nicely. It represents forgetting knowledge, becoming out of shape, etc. I think, though, that there should be a limit to the decay, like a min of 20% of your highest point. I dunno why right now, I just think it shouldn''t decay all the way. Ask me later when my brain isn''t fried.
------------------------------------------- "What's the story with your face, son?!?"
-------------------------------------------The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.Exodus 14:14
I am going to have to re-read all the decay stuff, but if it is not in the doc, it soon will be. Note: An update will not be available until Saturday at the earliest
If there ain''t no Dragons in your game, and nary a dungeon in sight, why are you even considering this system? Would you use Quake''s engine to push a polygonal Tetris?
Dude, where do you work? As soon as I get a budget I''m gonna hire you! (or work for you, if ya'' already got a budget)
I''m glad to find someone else preachin'' the gospel. If we don''t want to be stuck in the D&D ghetto until Diablo MCLIV, we''ve GOT to think of other systems that could offer interesting gameplay. Once we have a system, we need to pull it apart and get all the relevant variables, then put it together again in code!!!!
This applies even for fantasy! I still can''t get my hands dirty with court intrigue in a fantasy RPG in a flexible, replayable way!
I think the problem here is that we''re dealing with the non-obvious. As a coder, I''m used to looking at the world in terms of systems, values, and interactions. So your vars for the politics RPG (which I think wouldn''t be TOO bad with a little bit of backstabbing, lying, and bloodletting added ) were right on.
BTW, in another forum I tried to start this discussion: "http://www.egroups.com/message/gamedesign-l/298"
You might find it interesting if you check it out.
-------------------- Just waiting for the mothership...
--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...
). 
